Detection of <i>Leptospira</i> DNA in urine and presence of specific antibodies in outdoor cats in Germany
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives Clinical manifestation of infection with Leptospira species in cats is rare. Nevertheless, cats can develop specific antibodies against the spirochetes after infection. In Canada, Taiwan and the USA it was recently demonstrated that naturally infected cats can also shed DNA from pathogenic Leptospira species in their urine, but the zoonotic potential of infected cats is still unclear. The objective of this study was to demonstrate if outdoor cats in Germany shed DNA from pathogenic Leptospira species in their urine. As a second aim, antibody prevalence was determined. Methods Two hundred and fifteen outdoor cats were prospectively recruited. Urine samples were tested by real-time PCR targeting the lipL32 gene of pathogenic Leptospira species. Antibody titres against eight serovars (Australis, Autumnalis, Bratislava, Canicola, Copenhageni, Grippotyphosa, Pomona, Saxkoebing) belonging to seven serogroups (Australis, Autumnalis, Canicola, Grippotyphosa, Icterohaemorrhagiae, Pomona, Sejroe) were determined by microscopic agglutination test. Results Urine samples from 7/215 cats (3.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.9-5.7) were PCR-positive. Specific antibodies were detected in 35/195 cats (17.9%; 95% CI: 12.5-23.3) with titres ranging from 1:100 to 1:6400. Australis, Bratislava and Grippotyphosa were the most common serovars. Conclusions and relevance Outdoor cats in Germany can shed DNA from pathogenic Leptospira species. Therefore, outdoor cats should be considered as a possible source of infection for dogs or humans. Further studies are needed to determine the role of Leptospira species as a cause of disease in cats.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".